Democrats file HR 420 to legalize pot

No I read the whole thing. Pot is PACKED with tar, and that fact remains even if you can accumulate more tar in your lungs by smoking lot of cigarettes. All the pro-narc arguments such as "but how about opioids, but how about alcohol, but how about cigarettes" are losing arguments. We need an honest discussion about dangers of pot, and so far we have:

- Increased traffic accidents
- Mental illness caused by marijuana psycho-toxins
- Heart arrhythmia
- Pot PACKED with tar

If pot is legalized, we need to be able to inform users, especially the new ones, about these risk factors.

 

There is NO empirical evidence of increased traffic accidents!

The only instances of mental illness have been found in UNDERAGE users already susceptible to mental illness.

The latest scientific studies have established the EXACT OPPOSITE effect has been discovered regarding heart arrythmia. Post smokers have a DECREASED RISK!

https://www.hrsonline.org/News/Pres...t-Arrhythmias-Instead-May-Reduce-risk-of-AFib

There are actual BENEFICIAL effects from that tar that you are disingenuously IGNORING. This is the part in the Snopes article that you refuse to acknowledge.

If you want an HONEST discussion then you MUST include the POSITIVES as well as the negatives and not just cherrypick without factual substantiation.

 

As I said before, an honest discussion would involve accepting both negative and positive factors. Even if negative factors are found, it does not necessarily mean legalization cannot take place.

We already covered the increase in auto accidents in States which have legalized pot. We also covered the fact that pot contains enough tar to water-proof a rowing boat.

As for the heart, any pot smoker is familiar with the "racing heart" sensation while smoking pot. Some panic and call 911 thinking they are going to have a heart attack.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5542986/

Cannabis consumption has been shown to cause arrhythmia including ventricular tachycardia, and potentially sudden death, and to increase the risk of myocardial infarction (MI).

One of the most consistent effects of cannabis smoking on heart is 20% to 100% increase in HR which can last up to 2–3 hours, often accompanied by a slight increase in supine blood pressure. This effect of cannabis on HR is thought to be due to cannabis induced vasodilation causing reflex tachycardia . Consumption of higher doses of cannabis can cause postural hypotension associated with dizziness or fainting.

 

I don't know what joining the military has to do with being an adult. You will find plenty of immature morons in the military. Being old enough to wear an uniform does not make you mature or intelligent. You can join the military at 17. If you are ready to share the road with stoned and drunken teenagers, you are not very bright.

Using your logic, why have any age limit at all. What makes you qualified to determine when someone does anything. It is obvious you must be a nanny state guy wanting to tell everyone what they can do.

 

Thanks for clarifying. I always considered flaking not showing up or honoring a commitment. Sounded like they let their sofa down!

 

Good. Better that pot be produced in the U.S. legally so cartels don't get to make profit off of it.

 

ZERO empirical evidence that pot is the cause of an increase in traffic accidents and duly noted that you made no attempt to provide any.

That you are just fearmongering about the tar is duly noted.

Your out of date allegation about heart arrythmia has already been disproven by more recent studies.

Overdosing on anything causes problems which is just another disingenuous attempt at fearmongering.

 

That was the definition back during the good old days.

 

what? most people that do drugs such as pot and coke only commit that crime.

100 Million Americans do every year. They drink in front of thier kids every week.

 

I think your number is too high

But there are unquestionably many bad parents in America using addictive and illegal drugs

 

Here is a life lesson for you. Forbidden fruit is always the sweetest. If you want your kid to go crazy on a substance once they leave the home, strictly forbid it when they are home. If you kids observe responsible drinking and are allowed to have a beer on occasions it is not a big deal when they leave home. Observing a person who over imbibes is not a bad life lesson either. It is always the kid of the strict teetotalers who goes ape when he gets his freedom.

 

That's not how treaties work

 

Possess some openly in a state that hasn't legalized it then.

 

I know, just ask any American Indian tribe.

 

How often is alcohol sold to children? What are the penalties of same? Since its got a bar code on it, how traceable to a criminal clerk is it?
If its moonshine, how many extra felonies have occurred?

 

I was going more along the lines of his comment about ALL LEVELS of .gov wanting something and a treaty stopping us.
Treaties can be broken by Congress ffs. You don't need all levels you just need the legislature. At the level of support you need to overturn a treaty, the president's signature is superfluous as they can override a veto.

 

It was treaties and alliance between countries that resulted in the stupidest war ever fought in modern times, the First World War.

Before WW ll the United States rarely if ever had an alliance with other countries. By doing so you can find yourself in a shooting war that you don't want to fight.

 

If such were the case, the united nations would not be pushing for the united states to be a signatory to the international arms trade treaty.

 

True in the case of mutual defense pacts. Though you can always simply refuse to honor it. The Legislature has that power.

 

Are you seriously going to sit there and say that the legislature cannot void treaties?

What evidence do you have for that? The UN whining? Got anything more convincing than that?

 

The Democrats in Congress did exactly the same thing back in 1974 when they backstabbed South Vietnam which sent a message to North Vietnam...wink wink you cam now invade South Vietnam.

 

International treaties can be exited on a vote of the Senate.

 

Nixon pulled out of Vietnam. Period. Everyone knew South Vietnam was not able to defend itself.

 

Remember the Easter Offensive ?

Even I was surprised.

But ARVAN couldn't have done it without the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy naval gunfire support.

General Giep thought he was George Patton or Rommel and got his butt whooped again just like during Tet of 68.

As long as there was a threat of B-52's bombing the **** out of North Vietnam (which the Paris Peace Accords called for) North Vietnam wouldn't have violated the Paris Peace Accords and invaded South Vietnam in 1975.

 

That is not true. South Vietnam had the worlds 4th largest air force, they had over a million well armed men, they had several times as much heavy armor and artillery. What they lacked was the will to fight. They broke and fled from every engagement. The NVA armed and equipped itself with the weapons and equipment the fleeing ARVN left behind.

In the end, the only difference is they traded a South Vietnamese tyrant for one from the North.